I'll probably get this functionality by operating directly on the Log4J API, but enabling the page only if Log4J is on the classpath.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Costin Manolache" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 10:48 AM Subject: Re: Logging strategy > > The only problem is that Tapestry originally had a special, built-in web > > page for creating Log4J loggers (nee categories), and changing Log4J > > levels > > (nee priorities). This used addtiional methods in Log4J Logger for > > setting > > the level, and elsewhere for creating new loggers. The commons-logging > > folks are pretty adamant that extrending the framework for these > > operations isn't appropriate. (I disagree, but it's not a fight I'm > > prepared to wage, or expect to win). > > I agree with you - partially. We should have a config mechansim - but it > shouldn't be part of the core logging interfaces. > > I would vote +1 on an optional interface that allows some basic > configuration ( like setting the level for a category ), but I don't think > it would get a majority. > > My prefference is JMX for configuration - log4j already has some support for > that, and it would be possible to create mbeans to manage jdk1.4 logging as > well ( or other logging impl. ). It is on my todo list ( next to using JDNI > java:env/ to select the logger implementation ) - but I don't have the time > right now. > > Costin > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
